Selecting an appropriate learningmanagement system in open

and distance learning:a strategic approach

Nikhil KantSOMS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India

K.D. PrasadRSD, IGNOU, New Delhi, India, and

Kumari AnjaliSOS, IGNOU, New Delhi, India

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to derive criteria for a strategic selection of learning management system (LMS)after making an analysis of the feedback data collected from learners and academic counselors in open anddistance learning (ODL) to evaluate their perceptions. This analysis hints at the need to implement a learningmanagement system (LMS) inODL. Selecting an appropriate LMS can prove to be a strategic approach for ODLin achieving self-reliance and competitiveness.Design/methodology/approach – Research design includes qualitative design intended to discuss thefeatures, advantages and attributes of different popular LMSs and compare them. In addition, the quantitativedesign (a questionnaire-based online feedback) to analyze the perceptions of the learners and academiccounselors in order to know their e-learning needs has also been used. Results have been exhibited in tabular/graphical formats for easy comprehension and enhanced understanding.Findings – Findings of the study suggest that availability of plethora of LMSs in the market, which alsoinclude open source (OS) LMSs, makes the decision- making as regards selection of an appropriate LMSstrategically crucial requiring adequate consideration of every aspect such as cost, quality, usage, capacity,budget and most importantly priorities and objectives.Research limitations/implications –This studywill help educational administrators and decision-makersin ODL for building a quality civilized life and empowered society by removing the constraints related tofinancial problems, disabilities, time, geographical conditions and many others in bringing education to thedoorstep of every willing learner. The technical details of LMS, however, were intentionally kept simplified toachieve the objective and provide easy comprehensibility for the reader with little technical background, whichmight be a limitation of this study.Originality/value – This study highlights that ODL has tasted success with optimum exploitation ofdifferent technological advancements in its transformational expedition from conventional learning toinnovative e-learning and to the newest adaptive e-learning system. The huge potential of LMS, in providinglearners and educators in ODL with an effective web-based learning system incorporating almost all theacademic activities, has attracted organizations for using it not only for imparting education to learners butalso for providing appropriate trainings to their human resources.

Keywords Learning management system (LMS), Open and distance learning (ODL), Open source (OS),

Sustainable development goals (SDGs), Strategic approach, Technological advancements

Paper type Research paper

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

79

© Nikhil Kant, K.D. Prasad and Kumari Anjali. Published in the Asian Association of Open UniversitiesJournal. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the CreativeCommons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and createderivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to fullattribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2414-6994.htm

Received 20 September 2020Revised 11 January 2021

21 January 20214 February 20219 February 202111 February 2021

Accepted 16 February 2021

Asian Association of OpenUniversities JournalVol. 16 No. 1, 2021

pp. 79-97Emerald Publishing Limited

e-ISSN: 2414-6994p-ISSN: 1858-3431

DOI 10.1108/AAOUJ-09-2020-0075

1. IntroductionAdvancements and innovations in technology have affected different fields of our daily lifeincluding innovative methods adopted for education and trainings. Ramadhani et al. (2019)argue that adoption of appropriate technological advancements is found to be immenselyuseful in making learning and teaching more dynamic in education. These arguments arefurther supported by Abdurrahman et al. (2019) that it not only affects the relationshipbetween educational instructors and learners but also the value of the education systemarising from the improvised learning process. Having encountered numerous challenges andbarriers, learners including lifelong learners have resorted to open and distance learning(ODL), which is known to have successfully harnessed technological advancements forproviding them with enabling learning environments due to enhanced interactivity offeringnewer opportunities of education for the learners who have been facing various constraints inthe conventional system of learning (Kant and Anjali, 2020; Nayak et al., 2020). In thesesituations, learning management system (LMS), by virtue of its huge perceived latentpotentialities, has offered itself to be exploited appropriately for the satisfaction of theeducational needs of learners and instructors both.

An LMS contains an effective web-based learning system of sharing study materials,making announcements, conducting evaluation and assessments, generating results,communicating interactively in synchronous and asynchronous ways amongst variousother academic activities. There has been greater emphasis of implementing an LMS moreparticularly in developing countries in recent times, posit Bervell and Umar (2017), wheremajority of the educational institutions in general and higher educational institutions inparticular have employed LMS to enhance delivery of education as the mediatingtechnological platform between the educational instructors and learners bridging the gapbetween them in an ODL system (Naveh et al., 2012). LMS, thus, is being usedcomprehensively by advanced educational institutions in imparting education to learnersand also providing trainings to academic as well as administrative human resources(Alameen and Dhupia, 2019).

In one such developing country India, the erstwhile Distance Education Council (nowDistance Education Bureau under the UGC in India,) had sensed the future needs a decadeago. It had started to make efforts to improve the quality of ODL programmes through anLMS using a technological platform for facilitating and supplementing educationalprogrammes offered by ODL including professional and vocational programmes in orderto increase skills and competencies for improved prospects of employability. Emphasis wason implementing a LMS integrating the essential teaching elements of class sessions, learningmaterials, virtual lab and assessment/assignment in addition to the provisions of aframework to translate the contents into other major languages of India and provisions ofadding contents to the sessions by teaching staff (IGNOU, 2011).

Given that different LMSs have different set of advantages and disadvantages, selectionof an appropriate LMS is of strategic significance for institutions. This paper, taking a cuefrom an analysis of the feedback data collected from learners and academic counselors inODL to evaluate their perceptions, aims to derive the criteria for strategic selection of LMS toimplement it in ODL. This paper will facilitate the decision-making for implementing an LMSin ODL as selecting an appropriate LMS can prove to be a strategic approach for ODL inachieving competitiveness. To that end, the next section informs in brief the changinglandscapes of ODL contextualizing an Indian perspective. The consequent sections provideinformation about thematerials andmethods employed in this study and present an abridgedaccount of the perceptions of ODL stakeholders, namely learners and academic counselors foran enhanced understanding of the background of this study. Next is a section providingrelevant information related to an LMS for an enhanced understanding. Finally, there is asection elaborating the selection of LMS in ODL as a strategic approach before culminating

AAOUJ16,1

80

into the conclusions section. The findings will be useful for future researchers in gettingsuitable research directions and also for the educational administrators and decision-makersengaged in the field of ODL system for building a quality civilized life and empowered societyby removing the constraints related to financial problems, disabilities, time, geographicalconditions and many others in bringing education to the doorstep of every willing learnermore particularly in developing countries.

2. ODL: the changing landscapeCOL (2020) highlights ODL is an educational innovation which has flourished immensely inprevious several decades with the support of robust principles of pedagogy and immensepower of technological innovations. McQuaide (2009) states it has successfully beencombating constraints related to access, presenting itself as a viable alternative of capacitybuilding. Ural (2007) argues that ODL has emerged as a possible alternative of traditionalsystem of learning, which has been struggling with plethora of problems in maintainingquality primarily due to overcrowded classrooms. Brown (2006) highlights that last fewdecades have witnessed ODL emerging phenomenally in the form of an effective mode oflearning, inducing the shift in learning paradigm from “Teaching to Learning Facilitation toFacilitated and Supported Enquiry”. Across this expedition starting from correspondence tothe new and innovative forms, ODL has harnessed optimally the technological advancementsto live up to the dynamically changing learning needs.

Leveraging the huge potential of ensuring presence of teachers and learners at the sametime and space, ODL has been successful in maintaining the continuance of teaching learningprocess during any adverse circumstances such as floods, conflict, fires or any such event. Itsunparalleled contributions have been duly acknowledged and applauded during theoccurrence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic when the ODL institutionsremained functional even though other institutions remained closed (COL, 2020). The uniqueattributes of ODL have helped it to expand exponentially and attract learners greatly usingthe advantages of technological innovations to harness the benefits of globalization in thefield of higher education, which also have exposed it to several accreditations, such ascollaborations, quality, digital divide, equity and human rights related challenges requiringproactive approaches from ODL to address them (Jung, 2005).

UNESCO (2002) reports that ODL, as a representative of the educational process withgreater usage of teaching and communication, seeks support from the artificial print/electronic medium to bridge the gaps of time and space between learners and teachers.It considers technological innovations vital to enhance its effectiveness, underpinned by thedevelopment of certain role-specific competencies helpful in becoming a better competitorthan conventional mode of learning. Brenner (2007) and Kant (2020) lay emphasis on thetransforming capability of the innovative technologies as regards the instructional deliverymechanism in ODL between learners and instructors in imparting theoretical as well aspractical learning. AsTait (2018) andNayak et al. (2020) argue, globalization, in themeantime,requires ODL institutions to be ready for competition not only from local but also overseasand institutions to embrace advanced technology for making the most of the strategicadvantages of technological developments in order to enhance access and flexibility.

The countries in the Asia–Pacific region, having huge actively enrolled students in anumber of mega universities, have beenmaking efforts to harness the potential of ODL (Jung,2005) in their bid to attain sustainable development (Siaciwena and Lubinda, 2008). COL(2020) demonstrates a roadmap for harnessing the capacity of ODL in developing countries(highlighting its huge contributions to the education sector as regards increasing access andquality, improving support for inclusion, reducing costs and carbon footprint) such as India.India has a much less Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in higher education of only 24.5% in the

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

81

age group of 18–23 years while some of the developed countries have reached 90% or more.However, ODL in India currently has remarkable 12% of the total enrollments in highereducation and promises to contribute significantly to the GER and education to thedisadvantaged learners (MHRD, 2016).

While COL (2020) underscores the importance of ODL mentioning that it is serving theneeds of more than 4.4 million learners in the Commonwealth, the arguments of Wolcott(2003) also highlight the support that developing countries like India have secured from thegrowth of ODL for taking higher education to the farthest parts of the country with theoptimum use of technology in providing better learning experience with higher flexibility,interactivity and self-reliance. COL (2020) lays emphasis on the urgent need to promote andimplement technology-driven learning policies and strategies to deploy affordabletechnology giving due attention to the constraint of access to computers and Internetconnectivity, which are the biggest challenges in the way of ensuring last mile access. COL(2020), further, underscores the urgent need to develop blended learning environments in linewith the learners’ needs and to embrace a suitable online learning system to achieve expectedlearning outcomes.

3. Materials and methodIn this study, a qualitative design has been applied to review the extant literature for thepurpose of discussing the features, advantages and attributes of different popular LMSs andfor comparing them, so that the decision-making for implementing an LMS in ODL could befacilitated to ensure enabling an e-learning environment through selection of the best-suitedLMS, as a strategic approach to achieve enhanced competitiveness. A quantitative design hasalso been applied for analyzing the data collected by IGNOU (Indira Gandhi National OpenUniversity) through a questionnaire-based online feedback using SPSS 21 for the statisticaltests and descriptive analysis to analyze the perceptions of its learners (n 5 51,801) and itsacademic counselors (n 5 3,284).

4. Understanding the background through analyzing perceptions of ODLstakeholdersIn India, the IGNOU as an apex ODL institution has continuously been extending guidance toother institutions with similar objectives by its leadership in optimally utilizing technologicaladvancements. It has improved satisfaction of learners by appropriately realizing that ODLdepends heavily on the learner-centric flexible approach for its recognition. This realizationhas provided the IGNOUwith the leadership position amongODL institutions (IGNOU, 2020).

This study used the data collected through two separate questionnaire-based onlinefeedbacks collected by the IGNOU to evaluate the attitude of its learners (n5 51,801) towardthe usefulness of the provision of self learning material (SLM) in electronic media formastering the content and of its academic counselors (n5 3,284) toward the keenness of thelearners to use the e-SLM for studying the course. The coefficient reliability of thequestionnaire disseminated among learners was checked using Cronbach α, the value ofwhich was substantially high (0.90). It hinted at the adequate reliability of the questionnaire(Nunnally, 1978). The initial questions were related to the general profile of the learnersfollowed by the question to know their attitude toward the usability of the provision of SLMin electronic media for mastering the content. The descriptive statistics of the general profileof the respondent learners in terms of gender, employment status, category and age groups(in years) are presented in Figure 1.

Majority of the learners (49.17%: agree, and 14.27%: strongly agree totaling 63.44%) hadfavorable attitude toward the usability of the provision of SLM in electronic media for

AAOUJ16,1

82

mastering the content whereas 25.86% were neutral. However, there were only few learners(8.68%: disagree, and 2.02%: strongly disagree totaling 10.70%) who had negative attitude.The evaluation of the learners’ responses suggests that the usability of the provision of SLMin electronic media for mastering the content was adequate (Table 1 and Figure 2).

Gender Employment Status

Age Group in YearsCategorybelow 2020-3030-4040-50Above 50

SCSTOBCGen

MaleFemale Un-employed

Employed

Transgender

14.43%

0.97% 10.42%13.47%

6.59%

54.91%

35.19%

64.81%

0.03%

53.27%46.70%

Mean 3.65Median 4.00Mode 4Std. deviation 0.899Variance 0.808Skewness �0.640Kurtosis 0.322Minimum 1Maximum 5

Figure 1.General profile of therespondent (learners)

Table 1.Descriptive statisticsregarding usability of

the provision of SLM inelectronic media for

mastering the content

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

83

The coefficient reliability of the second questionnaire related to the academic counselors’ feedback was checked using Cronbach α, in which the value was substantially high(0.84). It too hinted at the adequate reliability of the questionnaire (Nunnally, 1978). Theinitial questions were related to the general profile of the academic counselors followedby the question to know their attitude whether the learners are keen to use the e-SLMfor studying the course. The descriptive statistics of the general profile of therespondent the academic counselors in terms of gender, age groups (in years), category,total experience as academic counselor in the IGNOU (number of years) and whetherthey have attended the orientation programmes conducted by the IGNOU are presentedin Figure 3.

Majority of the academic counselors (51.98%: agree, and 20.04%: strongly agree totaling72.02%) had favorable attitude that the learners are keen to use the e-SLM for studying thecourse whereas 19.31% were neutral. However, there were few academic counselors (7.98%:disagree, and 0.70%: strongly disagree totaling 8.68%) who had negative attitude. Theevaluation of the academic counselors’ responses adequately suggests that the learners arekeen to use the e-SLM for studying the course (Table 2 and Figure 4).

The analysis of the feedback data received from learners and academic counselors helps inconcluding that not only the learners but also the educators have favorable opinion for thee-learning. Since the Internet-based technological advancements, LMS has evolved as one ofthe most common e-learning technological platforms transforming the education delivery inODL (Mohamedbhai, 2011) and adoption of an appropriate e-learning system invariablyconstituting an LMS would enhance the usability of the provision of SLM in electronic mediain the teaching learning process in ODL. Their attitudes hint at the possibility that using anLMS would enhance their interest in the study reducing the challenges associated with a

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Provision of SLM in electronic media is useful for mastering the content

0

10

20

30

40

50

Perc

ent

2.02

8.68

25.86

49.17

14.27

Figure 2.Usability of theprovision of SLM inelectronic media formastering the content

AAOUJ16,1

84

Have you attended Orientation Programmes conducted by IGNOU?

Category

Age Group (in years)Gender

Total experience as Academic Counsellor in IGNOU(number of years)

YesNo

SCSTOBCGen

OneOne to Three YearsThree to Five YearsMore than Five Years

25 to 3536 to 4546 to 5556 and above

MaleFemaleTransgender

0.03%

59.87%

40.10%

24.90%

13.66%

21.46%

39.98%

16.57%

47.88% 19.34%

16.21%

46.05%53.95%

7.43%

4.31%

17.57%

70.69%

Figure 3.General profile of therespondent (academic

counselors)

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

85

monotonous self-learning mechanism making learning more interactive and meaningfulmentoring their individualized learning based on the individual’s learning style.

5. Learning management system (LMS)The evolution of ODL is partly attributed to the technological advancements, and theircontributions are reflected in different generations of delivery of education in an ODL system(Bervell and Arkorful, 2020). Education has continuously been undergoing fundamentaltransformation keeping pace with the dynamic technological advancements. The continuoustransformations have increased variety in the learners and their needs with higher demandfor greater flexibility, interactivity and ease in learning anytime anywhere (Nayak et al.,2020). It is notable that the advent of Internet has offered plethora of teaching learning toolsand applications to be used at different stages of teaching enhancing the teaching– learning

Mean 3.83Median 4.00Mode 4Std. deviation 0.864Variance 0.746Skewness �0.664Kurtosis 0.251Minimum 1Maximum 5

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Perc

ent

The learners are keen to use the e-SLM for studying the course

0.70

7.98

19.31

51.98

20.04

Table 2.Descriptive statisticsregarding keenness ofthe learners to use thee-SLM for studying thecourse

Figure 4.Keenness of thelearners to use thee-SLM for studying thecourse

AAOUJ16,1

86

process more effective and efficient (Cavus, 2015). Aoki (2012) argues that the current era ofODL is its fifth generation, which is based on the intelligent flexible learning model using theinteractivity of Internet, having migrated from the third generation, which used informationand communication technology (ICT) effectively for the first time to incorporate interactivityin distance learning to be accepted as an era of open and distance learning, and forthgeneration which used Internet for online delivery of content.

Introduction and continuous increase in the usage of LMS in the new century havetransformed the delivery mechanism of education not only in an ODL system but also theconventional face-to-face based distance education, which have leveraged the mediatingtechnological capabilities of LMS in the relations of educational instructors and learners(Bervell and Arkorful, 2020). Mohamedbhai (2011) too argues that with the advancements inthe Internet-based technologies, LMS has evolved as one of the most common technologicalplatforms, which have transformed the education delivery in distance education system.

Lonn andTeasley (2009) define LMS as aweb-based system,which facilitates learners andinstructors in sharing learning materials and assignments, and communicating online. Itsquality and scales can be assessed by expenditure incurred on software, its update andsupport mechanism. The LMS contains facilitating mechanisms for registration, course/participants statistics, scheduling, assessments, examinations, grades, synchronous andasynchronous communications and materials, such as interactive applications, contents,documents, papers, audio and video files, supporting teaching– learning process and furtherenhancing their sustainability and reusability.

Karag€oz et al. (2017) emphasize the need for its user-friendliness, and Chao and Chen (2009)enumerate quality of e-learning platform, materials, synchronous learning, learning recordsand self-learning as the primary selection criteria of LMS. Further, Chao and Chen (2009)underscore the usability of e-learning, which invariably constitutes an LMS, in ODL inincreasing the multiple advantages and alternative learning opportunities for learners ingetting education without facing the constraint of space and time more particularly in anasynchronous manner at the same time, also saving costs for ODL institutions. Further,Dzandu and Tang (2015) remind that these learners also include workers and learners inremote areas who, despite willing to get education, do not have access to a conventionalclassroom learning system, thanks to plethora of constraints. Bervell andArkorful (2020) findthat several factors and facilitating conditions such as voluntariness of use and actual usebehavior are abundantly showcased in the contemporary studies as enablers for LMS usagein real world. Karag€oz et al. (2017) and Shee andWang (2008) highlight its emergence as a newmeans of facilitating learning which has been encouraged, not only academia but alsoindustry , for making commensurate investments in its adoption.

The LMS preserves the logs of the users such as system administrators, coursecoordinators, instructors, learners and guests and of system also (Karag€oz et al., 2017). Cavus(2015), Fojtik (2015) and Lonn and Teasley (2009) argue in favor of preparation of suitablelearning materials for ODL learners using technology to eliminate the misconception amongnew or prospective learners that ODL is harder than conventional face-to-face learning(Fojtik, 2015). Karag€oz et al. (2017) argue in favor of the greater usability of LMS as a learningtool in ODL underscoring its increased use in a number of universities globally. Mu~noz et al.(2015) too hint at its huge potentialities in introducing advanced features to improve teachinglearning experience, contributing finally toward improvised academic outcomes.

The LMS can broadly be categorized into two groups, i.e. free open source (OS) LMS andcommercial proprietary LMS, put forth by Karag€oz et al. (2017). It is notable that Chao andChen (2009) in their study have highlighted the significance of license costs, learningflexibility, security and market share as the main factors for decision-making as regardsselection of LMS. Here, Karag€oz et al. (2017) consider LMS as the solution of plethora ofproblems related to ODL, and OS which, as Cavus and Zabadi (2014) inform, is the software

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

87

source code readily available to any user free of cost for extension and modification as perneeds; therefore, OS LMS is not similar to the priced commercial proprietary LMS being soldin the market. Since OS LMSs are available in the market with different strengths andweaknesses (Capterra, 2020), it becomes strategically significant to be adequately informedabout them.

6. Strategic selection of appropriate LMS in ODLDiscussions so far lay emphasis on the need to ensure inclusive and sustainable development,leveraging the greater access, equality, quality and expansion related potentialities of anODLsystem. Bordoloi (2018) argues that higher ease and comfort of ODL institutions withtechnological developments can strengthen higher education system in developing countriesby improving capability of providing learners with affordable education at their doorstepwithout compromising quality. The emphasis of Noorani (2014) is on the urgent requirementfor every organization to keep itself on continuous lookout for newer tools, services andapproaches for the purpose of securing competitiveness. Technological innovations such asLMS possess immense disrupting potentialities with lasting effects on ODL. Kant (2019)emphasizes that, with the increased competition in the ODL environment, instructors in ODLmust possess fundamental characteristics such as possession of fundamental technologicalskills and ease in using tech-tools and pedagogical practices in line with greater meaningfullearner-centered learning, in addition to subject knowledge. Kant (2019) also emphasizes theneed for them to make continuous efforts to enhance capabilities of combining tangible andintangible resources, so that they could remain competitive and useful in an educationalarena witnessing continuously increasing institutions with similar objectives in a liberalized,privatized and globalized world.

Using a commercial LMS requires huge investments for an organization (Alameen andDhupia, 2019) more particularly in the ODL system, which has already incurred hugeexpenditure on fixed assets (Kant, 2020). Selection of such an OS LMSwhich has potentials tooffer user-friendly tool integration by virtue of possessing similar features of a commercialLMS can be helpful for an institution in saving expenditure on e-learning implementation.These discussions on different OS LMSs can help decision-makers in ODL in implementingan LMS in order to embrace adaptive e-learning transitioning from conventional e-learning.The analysis of the feedback of the learners and academic counselors also supports this.Alameen and Dhupia (2019), highlighting that license cost is more important than otherfactors, consider selection of the appropriate OS LMS with the best tools is a strategicallyimportant decision for its successful implementation. Focusing on the significant criteria asregards their usability and features, the outcome of an attempt to search relevant OS LMSs ispresented in Table 3.

Above comparison of OS LMSs, based on significant criteria with respect to their relevantusability and features in ODL, provides a fair idea for selection of an appropriate LMS. Thedecision-makers in ODL can make the best selection based on the significant features,learning processes and characteristics of the LMS tools depending upon their objectives andpriorities. The other relevant details, which might be useful for them, are also provided inTable 4.

While “Make My LMS” is the only LMS located in India and the latest among them, it isnotable that some of these OS LMSs, for e.g. “Moodle” the oldest among all of them, have beenadopted by multiple institutions including universities. As Alameen and Dhupia (2019)report, they have been researched upon substantially, have offered a developer’s experiencesharing forum in order to address associated problems by providing ready solutions and alsohave used innovations profusely providing thereby sufficient guidance to the new projectdevelopers, Alameen and Dhupia (2019) further inform that suitable OS LMSs offer variety of

AAOUJ16,1

88

Nam

e

12

34

56

78

910

Moodle

Educadium

Docebo

Sakai

Canvas

CHAMILO

Open

edX

NEOLMS

Instancy

learning

Make

My

LMS**

Yearof

foundation

2002

2008

2005

2004

2015

2010

2012

2010

2002

2016

Idealusersize

1,000þ

1–1,000þ

100–

1,000þ

NP*

500–

1,000þ

1,000þ

NP*

10–

1,000þ

1–1,000þ

1–1,000þ

Platform

Web-based,

cloud,

Window

sand

Apple

Web-based

andcloud

Web-

based

and

cloud

Web-based,

cloudand

Window

s

Web-

based

and

cloud

Web-based,

cloudand

SaaS

Web-

based,

cloudand

SaaS

Web-

based

and

cloud

Web-

based

and

cloud

Web-

based

and

cloud

Mobile

iOSand

Android

iOSand

Android

iOSand

Android

iOS

iOSand

Android

iOSand

Android

iOSand

Android

Academ

ic/education

UU

UU

UU

UU

UU

Asynchronous

learning

UU

UU

UU

UU

U

Blended

learning

UU

UU

UU

UU

Built-in

course

authoring

UU

UU

UU

UU

U

Corporate/business

UU

UU

UU

UU

E-com

merce

UU

UU

UU

E-learning

companies

UU

UU

UU

U

Gam

ification

UU

UU

UU

ULearner

portal

UU

UU

UU

UU

Mobile

learning

UU

UU

UU

UU

UShareablecontent

objectreference

modelcompliance

UU

UU

UU

UU

U

Synchronous

learning

UU

UU

UU

UU

Video

conferencing

UU

UU

UU

UU

(continued

)

Table 3.Open source LMS:

comparisons

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

89

Nam

e

12

34

56

78

910

Moodle

Educadium

Docebo

Sakai

Canvas

CHAMILO

Open

edX

NEOLMS

Instancy

learning

Make

My

LMS**

Inperson

UU

NP*

UU

UNP*

Liveonline

UU

UNP*

UU

UU

NP*

Webinars

UU

UNP*

UU

UU

NP*

Documentation

UU

UNP*

UU

UU

NP*

Note(s):*N

otprovided

bytheVendor;**L

ocated

inIndia

Thedetails

inthis

table

weresummarized

from

relevantpages

inthewebsite:https://www.capterra.com/learning-m

anagem

ent-system

-softw

are/

(accessed

17September,2020)

Table 3.

AAOUJ16,1

90

Nam

ePrimarilyusedby

Importantdetails

1Moodle

Universities,schools,nonprofitorganizationsandenterprise

inthe

vocationaleducation

andtrainingsector

Provides

educators

globally

withascalable,custom

izableandsecurede-

learningsolution

withthelargestselectionofactivitiesandissupportedbyan

activenetworkof

certifiedassistingpartnersforsupportanddevelopment

2Educadium

Corporations,governmentagencies,H

Rdepartm

ents,trainers,nonprofit

organizationsandtradeassociations

Affordable,pow

erfulcloud-hostedperfectsolution

forself-paced,facilitated

orblended

e-learningcourses

withthefacilities

offullshareablecontentobject

reference

modelsupport,integratedquizbuildingandwebinar

solutions,

certificates,m

obilesupport,e-commerce

amongotherscombiningease

ofuse

withpow

erful,scalableandflexiblefeaturesincludingcustom

ized

integrationsandfullcourseproductionserviceoptions

3Docebo

Com

paniesaroundtheworld

Automates

learningmanagem

entfacilitatinginform

allearningapplied

inthe

flow

ofworkandpersonalizes

theadministrativeas

wellaslearnerexperiences

usingartificialintelligence

optimallytowardmeasurablelearningoutcom

esin

linewiththespecifiedobjectives

4Sakai

Higher

education

institutions

Itisaptinhandlingoftheannouncements,assignments,calendar,gradebook,

testsandquizzes

5CANVAS

Colleges,universities,schoolsandsm

allandmedium-sized

enterprises

morewithanalytics

andintegratedcustom

errelationship

managem

ent

(CRM)capabilities

Ultim

ate,professionally

supportedplatform

developed

topow

erresponsive

websitesdesigned

forconversion

anddigitalmarketingcampaigns,which

facilitatescreation

ofdynam

iclandingpages,launchingof

digitalcampaigns,

monitoringof

analytics,m

anagingof

CRM

contacts,sendingof

email

campaignsam

ongothers

6CHAMILO

Primaryeducation

institutionsandbio-pharmaceuticalcompanies

Supportssimultaneousworkingandlearning

7Open

edX

Educators

anddevelopers

Supportscreation

ofcourseandmassiveopen

onlinecourseandtheirdelivery

8NEOLMS

Universities

andschools

Helpsschoolsmanageallclassroom

activitiesincludingcreation

anddelivery

ofeducationalcontent,assessmentof

learnerswithtrackingof

resultsand

promotionof

communicationandcollaborationbetweenlearnersand

educators

fororganizationsglobally

9Instancy

learning

Educationalinstitutesformanaging,deliveringandevaluatinglearning

programs

Helpsinmanaging,evaluating,planninganddeliveringlearningprogramsfor

educationalinstitutionsas

wellas

businesses,providingsupportfordelivery

andmanagem

entof

thee-learning-blended

socialandmobile-personalized

learning

10MakeMy

LMS

Colleges,universities,schools,coachinginstitutesincludingindividual

tutors/trainersandcompanies

Provides

anend-to-enddigitaleducationalsolution

forinstitutionssuch

asschools,universities,coachinginstitutesandcompanies

Note(s):Thedetailsin

thistableweresummarized

from

relevantpages

inthewebsite:https://www.capterra.com/learning-m

anagem

ent-system

-softw

are/(accessed17

September,2020)

Table 4.Open source LMS:

users and importantdetails

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

91

preferable customizing plug-ins in addition to the facility to program new plug-ins andprovide the users with the sophisticated secured internal and external communicationenvironment comprising discussion forums, real-time chats and exchange of files and otherattachments. Such OS LMSs make use of highly secured authentication tools for user accessauthentication in using the resources, single login authentication and message broadcastingof authentication.

The model proposed by Alameen and Dhupia (2019), based on the IEEE LTSA modeldemonstrating teacher–learner interaction with the system, mainly consists of learner,teacher and adaptation modules. Alameen and Dhupia (2019) highlight the model of LMShaving two stores, i.e. stores of learning resources containing tutorials, tools, experiments,etc. and stores of learner records containing learners’ general information along with theirpast details and present working behavior. Further, they inform about the presence of fourprocessing entities, i.e. learned entity comprising individual learner or group of learnersbelonging to a specific category, second entity teacher and the system coach responsible fortracking their learning preference the learningmaterial and the guidance (e.g. learning styleand learning strategy), which can later be modified with the help of using LMSimplementing individualized learning, the third entity delivery interacting with the systemcoach to get the learning resource and distribute thematerial to the users in the LMS and theforth entity evaluation, which undertakes learners behavior analysis and performanceevaluation to be saved in the stores of learners record for future reference (Alameen andDhupia, 2019).

Renowned researchers in the field of strategic management such as Barney (1991);Bharadwaj (2000), Peteraf (1993) and Porter (1980, 1985) have stressed that organizationstend to achieve favorable results and ultimately competitiveness by exploiting agileexecution of suitable strategy of improving efficiency and effectiveness and better utilizationof resources including assets, capabilities, processes, attributes, information and knowledgeprimarily. Barney (2001) further emphasized the need of the possession of skills, capabilitiesand methods to use resources to outcompete rivals. Kant (2019) points out the need for ODLfor making strategic efforts to achieve competitiveness with the optimum uses of resources,core competencies, ICT and differentiated learning experiences. Competitiveness can beattained byODLwith the help of configuration and adequate harnessing of resources helpinglearners get education anywhere anytime, providing them with suitable alternative oflearning and securing support from advancements in the field of ICT and multimedia (Faridiand Ouseph, 2014; Kant, 2020). Therefore, OS LMS can be of great advantage for ODL facingacute competition from the growing number of institutions with similar objectives in theliberalized, privatized and globalized world (Kant, 2020).

Using appropriate LMS by an ODL institution can enhance learners’ satisfaction, whichcan also help it in attracting more new learners. Cavanaugh (2005) rightly puts it that thesesatisfied learners with positive perception can help ODL institutions improve futureperformance achieving enhanced image of a progressive institution. COL (2020) tooemphasizes that ODL institutions must make efforts for remaining connected with teachersand learners regularly with the use of advancements in technology in line with the dynamictransformations in the learning environment and opportunities. The foregoing discussionshighlight that selection of an suitable OS LMS in ODL needs to be based on its efficiency interms of enhancing the learning experience in general and e-learning experience in particularof learners and teachers both.

Karag€oz et al. (2017) argue that new opportunities have been opened for ODL by thetransformed technological environment. They consider LMS as the most important actor ofthe Internet-based ODL bringing the learners and the educators on the same platform foreducation and permitting them to undertake variety of educational activities such as deliveryof instructional materials, assignments and evaluations. Karag€oz et al. (2017) further add that

AAOUJ16,1

92

an LMS can be used by educational institutions and other organizations for the purpose ofeducation to learners as well as training of the employees. LMS therefore needs to be selectedin line with their objectives as each of them possesses different learning processes andcharacteristics. Alameen and Dhupia (2019) posit that decision-makers have differentpriorities and thus their best choice vary depending upon the priority for license cost,flexibility, security andmarket share of LMS. They conclude that with the priority for licensecosts and flexibility, OS LMS becomes the best choice. However, with the priority for securityand market share, commercial LMS becomes the best choice for the institutions. Emergingtechnological innovations are expected to disrupt educational environment by digitallytransforming social as well as educational perspectives (L�evy et al., 2018). The shift oforganizational attention in recent times toward technological innovations is emphasized byWeerawardena andMavondo (2011). Barney (1991) and Hitt et al. (2001) argue that intangibleresources are accorded higher strategic significance than tangible resources, and the LMSconstitutes one such intangible resource. In these circumstances, the ODL system mustexplore the potentialities of OS LMS as a strategic intangible resource in its quest ofcompetitive advantage without ignoring the associated challenges and weaknesses whichcould benefit one and all in the ODL system.

7. ConclusionThere is a need for the ODL system to adapt faster than their conventional counterparts as itserves the educational needs of more varied learners. Its huge contributions in previousfive decades have been highlighted by COL (2020) in providing quality teaching–learning,harnessing optimally the basket of technological advancements which open plethora ofnewer possibilities if the solutions are developed by their customization according tospecific contexts. OS LMS implementation can not only be cost effective if selected in ODLappropriately but can add differentiation to the system also. This study finds that thegreater advantages of using the LMS by ODL institutions can offer huge advantages andbenefits not only for learners and teachers but also for the ODL system by virtue of itsunique features and attributes. Learners and academic counselors in ODL also have shownpositive opinions as regards use of adaptive e-learning such as LMS in ODL. Using anappropriate LMS effectively and efficiently might influence the success of ODL helping it toattain sustained competitiveness in the educational market place and in strengthening thepillars of teaching–learning process by new ways of thinking to achieve high skills, GERand sustainable development goals.

This paper finds the availability of plethora of OS LMSs in themarket. Selection of the bestsuitable LMS for any ODL institution, therefore, is a strategically crucial step, which requiresperfect understanding of the features, facilities and characteristics required in line withinstitutional objectives. This study, on the basis of the comparison of the popular OS LMSs,demonstrates its usefulness for decision-makers in selecting the best suited LMS for ODLinstitutions, emphasizing that suitable OS LMS in ODL can not only be cost-effective due toOS but can also offer all the important features required for the implementation of an adaptivelearning environment in ODL. With the support of appropriate OS LMS, ODL can enhancelearning opportunities and experiences for its learners suffering from financial, geographical,disability, connectivity related constraints. Selecting an appropriate OS LMS can beconsidered to be an important significant approach in ODL as it not only can provide costleadership but differentiate helping to achieve competitiveness. This study eliminates thedisadvantages arising from the inadequacies of relevant studies explaining the strategiccontributions of OS LMS in ODL. Nonetheless, the study suffered limitation that the technicaldetails of LMS were intentionally kept simplified for easy comprehensibility for the readerswith little technical background.

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

93

Vitso et al. (2017) argue that selection of appropriate technology is vital in attainingcompetitiveness and hence strategically significant. LMS, which has emerged in recent timesprofusely leveraging technological advancements, can revolutionize the ODL system bydeveloping a more learner-centric ecosystem through multiple imbedded features andadvantages (Kant, 2020). Selecting an appropriate OS LMS can enhance the strategicpotentialities for an ODL institution. It can help the teaching–learning process in ODL inmaintaining quality of the performance, which in turn can help in eliminating negative notionwith respect to ODL among different stakeholders. With the unique attributes andadvantages, the perfectly selected OS LMS aligned with the institutional priorities andobjective can offer huge potentialities as a strategically important intangible resource forODL. Nonetheless, in order to harness the untapped potentials and leverage the benefits of OSLMS, ODL institutions need to organize frequent trainings for stakeholders to upgradenecessary skills and improve their quality, without ignoring the importance of consistencyand standards. Despite the element of cost effectiveness in the acquisition of OS LMSs, therequirement of suitably trained personnel for managing it is also emphasized in the findings.Keeping in view that use of LMS for enhancing education has continuously increased,improvement in LMSs for making them easy to use in the learning process may attract moreusers toward LMS in ODL. It is pertinent to mention that for ensuring its efficiency andeffectiveness, appropriate systemmanagement is required for constant monitoring, updatingand planning keeping in view all the technical, training, cost and learning pedagogicalaspects in a holistic manner aligned with the current infrastructure, policies and teaching–learning practices. Use of OS LMS in ODL, therefore, can provide an effective and efficientlearning solution containing new learning opportunities for its varied learners in thechanging digital landscape of the developing countries. ODL institutions need to strategicallyselect appropriate OS LMSs as affordable solutions for enhancing learning experiences oftheir varied learners, so that the LMS, as a powerful tool with wider acceptance in theeducational arena, can be used for facilitating greater learning opportunities through moreactive collaborative interactions and participations.

References

Abdurrahman, A., Nurulsari, N., Maulina, H. and Ariyani, F. (2019), “Design and validation of inquiry-based STEM learning strategy as a powerful alternative solution to facilitate gifted studentsfacing 21st century challenging”, Journal for the Education of Gifted Young, Vol. 7 March,pp. 33-56.

Alameen, A. and Dhupia, B. (2019), “Implementing adaptive e-learning conceptual Model : a surveyand comparison with open source LMS”, International Journal of Engineering and Technology,Vol. 14 No. 21, pp. 28-45.

Aoki, K. (2012), “Generations of distance education: technologies, pedagogies, and organizations”, inMuyinda, B. (Ed.), Distance Education, IntechOpen, pp. 1183-1187.

Barney, J.B. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.

Barney, J.B. (2001), “Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: a ten-year retrospective on theresource-based view”, Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 643-650.

Bervell, B. andArkorful, V. (2020), “LMS-enabledblended learningutilization indistance tertiary education:establishing the relationships among facilitating conditions, voluntariness of use and usebehaviour”, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, Vol. 17 No. 1, p. 6.

Bervell, B. and Umar, I.N. (2017), “A decade of LMS acceptance and adoption research in sub-SaharaAfrican higher education: a systematic review of models, methodologies, milestones and mainchallenges”, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Vol. 13 No. 11,pp. 7269-7286.

AAOUJ16,1

94

Bharadwaj, A. (2000), “A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firmperformance: an empirical investigation”, Management Information Systems Quarterly, Vol. 24No. 1, pp. 169-196.

Bordoloi, R. (2018), “Transforming and empowering higher education through open and distancelearning in India”, Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 2018.

Brenner, S.W. (2007), Law in an Era of ‘Smart’ Technology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Brown, T.H. (2006), “Beyond constructivism: navigationism in the knowledge era”, On the Horizon,Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 108-120.

Capterra (2020), “Learning management system software”, available at: https://www.capterra.com/learning-management-system-software (accessed 17 September 2020).

Cavanaugh, C. (2005), “Distance education success factors”, International Journal of EducationalTelecommunication, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-6.

Cavus, N. (2015), “Distance learning and learning management systems”, Procedia - Social andBehavioral Sciences, No. 191, pp. 872-877.

Cavus, N. and Zabadi, T. (2014), “A comparison of open source learning management systems ,procedia - social and behavioral sciences, A comparison of open source learning managementsystems”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 143, pp. 521-526.

Chao, R.J. and Chen, Y.H. (2009), “Evaluation of the criteria and effectiveness of distance e- learningwith consistent fuzzy preference relations”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 7,pp. 10657-10662.

COL (2020), Guidelines on Distance Education during COVID-19, COL, Burnaby.

Dzandu, M.D. and Tang, Y. (2015), “Beneath a learning management system - understanding thehuman information interaction in information systems”, Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 3 No. 3,pp. 1946-1952.

Faridi, M.R. and Ouseph, S.N. (2014), “New directions and challenges for ODL: building collaborativebusiness approach”, European Scientific Journal, Vol. 1 Special, pp. 217-223.

Fojtik, R. (2015), “Comparison of full-time and distance learning”, Procedia - Social and BehavioralSciences, 4thWorldConference onEducational TechnologyResearches,WCETR-2014, pp. 402-407.

Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (2001), “Strategic entrepreneurship: entrepreneurialstrategies for wealth creation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 479-492.

IGNOU (2011), “Expression_of_interest_for_learning_management_systems-406”, available at: http://www.ignou.ac.in/ignou/bulletinboard/announcements/latest/detail/EXPRESSION_OF_INTEREST_FOR_LEARNING_MANAGEMENT_SYSTEMS-406 (accessed 25 August 2020).

IGNOU (2020), IGNOU Profile 2020, Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi.

Jung, I. (2005), Innovative and Good Practices of Open and Distance Learning in Asia and the Pacific(Series: APEID, UNESCO Bangkok Occasional Paper Series), International Christian University,Tokyo, Vol. 3.

Kant, N. (2019), “Competitiveness in ODL from stakeholders’ perspective: a review and researchagenda”, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 59-72.

Kant, N. (2020), “Blockchain: a resource of competitive advantage in open and distance learningsystem”, in Sharma, R.C., Yildirim, H. and Kurubacak, G. (Eds), Blockchain TechnologyApplications in Education, IGI Global, pp. 127-152.

Kant, N. and Anjali, K. (2020), “Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK): a resource of sustainabledevelopment for tribal communities”, in Filho, W.L., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Salvia, A.L. andWall, T. (Eds), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, Encyclopedia of the UN SustainableDevelopment Goals (Living Reference), Springer Nature, Switzerland AG.

Karag€oz, E., Oral, L.€O., Kaya, O.H. and Tecim, V. (2017), “LMS selection process for effective distanceeducation system in organizations”, EBEEC Conference Proceedings, The Economies of Balkanand Eastern Europe Countries in the Changed World (2016), Vol. 2017, pp. 347-356.

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

95

L�evy, W., Stumpf-Wollersheim, J. and Welpe, I.M. (2018), “Disrupting education through blockchain-based education technology”, SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3210487.

Lonn, S. and Teasley, S.D. (2009), “Saving time or innovating practice: investigating perceptionsand uses of learning management systems”, Computers and Education, Vol. 53 No. 3,pp. 686-694.

McQuaide, S. (2009), “Making education equitable in rural China through distance learning”, TheInternational Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 1-21.

MHRD (2016), All India Survey on Higher Education (2015-16), MHRD, Govt. of India, Department ofHigher Education, New Delhi, available at: http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/statistics/AISHE2015-16.pdf.

Mohamedbhai, G. (2011), “Higher education in Africa: facing the challenges in the 21st century”,International Higher Education, Vol. 63, pp. 20-21.

Mu~noz, A., Lasheras, J., Capel, A., Cantabella, M. and Caballero, A. (2015), “On to Sakai: on theoptimization of a Learning Management System using semantics and user profiling”, ExpertSystems with Applications, Vol. 42 Nos 15–16, pp. 5995-6007.

Naveh, G., Tubin, D. and Pliskin, N. (2012), “Student satisfaction with learning management systems:a lens of critical success factors”, Technology Pedagogy and Education, Vol. 21 No. 3,pp. 337-350.

Nayak, S.R., Kant, N. and Anjali, K. (2020), “Strategy of using ICT in ODL to disseminate highereducation in tribal communities: a case of MP, India”, Asian Association of Open UniversitiesJournal, Vol. 15 No. 2, doi: 10.1108/AAOUJ-05-2020-0029.

Noorani, I. (2014), “Service innovation and competitive advantage”, European Journal of Business andInnovation Research, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 12-38.

Nunnally, J. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Peteraf, M.A. (1993), “The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view”, StrategicManagement Journal, Vol. 14, pp. 179-191.

Porter, M.E. (1980), Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York, NY.

Porter, M.E. (1985), The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, FreePress, New York, NY.

Ramadhani, R., Umam, R., Abdurrahman, A. and Syazali, M. (2019), “The effect of flipped-problembased learning model integrated with LMS-google classroom for senior high school students”,Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 137-158.

Shee, D.Y. and Wang, Y.S. (2008), “Multi-criteria evaluation of the web-based e- learning system: amethodology based on learner satisfaction and its applications”, Computers and Education,Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 894-905.

Siaciwena, R. and Lubinda, F. (2008), “The role of open and distance learning in the implementation ofthe right to education in Zambia”, International Review of Research in Open and DistanceLearning, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 149-186.

Tait, A. (2018), “Open Universities : the next phase”, Asian Association of Open Universities Journal,Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 13-23.

UNESCO (2002), Open and Distance Learning: Trends, Policy and Strategy Considerations, Division ofHigher Education, UNESCO, Paris.

Ural, O. (2007), “Attidues of graduate students toward distance education, educational technologiesand independent learning”, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 8 No. 4,pp. 34-43.

Vitso, M., Joar, B., Harkestad, G. and Krogh, S. (2017), A Study on Blockchain Technology as a Resourcefor Competitive Advantage (Dissertation), Norwegian University of Science andTechnology, Oslo.

AAOUJ16,1

96

Weerawardena, J. and Mavondo, F.T. (2011), “Capabilities, innovation and competitive advantage”,Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 40 No. 8, pp. 1220-1223.

Wolcott, L.L. (2003), “Dynamics of faculty participation in distance education: motivations, incentives,and rewards”, in Moore, M.G. and Anderson, W.G. (Eds), Handbook of Distance Education,Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, NJ, London, pp. 549-565.

Corresponding authorNikhil Kant can be contacted at: Nikhilkant25apr@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htmOr contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Learningmanagement

system in ODL

97